Hi,
Just a little question: since it is based on Debian testing, is antiX a rolling release? I think it's not, but I'm not sure... How exactly is it based on Debian testing anyway?
Thanks!

Once antiX is installed, you have a Debian testing system (or Debian stable depending on your selection at install time) with some extra antiX specific .deb packages added. For example, we've integrated Rox and SpaceFM icon managers into several pre-installed window managers, giving them desktop icons. You can select"Rox-Fluxbox" to start up Fluxbox with desktop icons or choose"Fluxbox" to get plain fluxbox without an icon manager.

As explained by the
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_release#Debian-related"
linktext was:"Wikipedia"
====================================
:

Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE) and antiX are cyclical rolling release Deb binary-based Linux distributions based on Debian testing. Debian testing is a cyclical development branch and is thus frozen before each release of Debian stable. During this time, Debian testing is no longer rolling, which affects rolling distributions based on it — like LMDE and antiX.

Such distributions are therefore described on this page as cyclically rolling releases (or cyclic-rolling for short) to distinguish them from other forms of rolling releases, and are not classed as fully rolling releases (or full-rolling for short).

Ok, I think i get it.
Thanks very much BitJam!

If instead you track Debian sid (unstable), which is an option at installation time, you then have a rolling release, rather than a cyclical rolling release. This would make your antiX installation more like siduction, aptosid, or LinuxBBQ.

I confess I don't truly grasp the implications. Windows gets updated constantly because all that glass invites stone throwers. Linux doesn't share that security concern. If serious bugs get discovered, fix updates make sense. Significant improvements also deserve updates. After a while, the OS works as well as it's going to. Usually, no one is using it by the time it is truly obsolete. Is there an ancient rolling OS? I understand that following some sort of an update schedule makes sense, but darned if I can understand how one or another system provides an advantage that has bearing on whether or not I should use a particular OS. I used to value the LTS designation, but I've come to the realization that I am not sufficiently long term or engaged with such massive and complex data that it matters. Am I missing something?